- From: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 17:49:31 -0400
- To: public-openannotation@w3.org
OK, I concede that [1] seems to slightly discourage the use of Named Graphs, though conceding their utility. Hence, my concern may not be of great impact. But I am slightly concerned by the tex in the OAX spect: "This form MUST ONLY be returned when dereferencing an Annotation's URI if the client explicitly requests a Named Graph serialization via Content Negotiation. This restriction is to ensure interoperability with clients that can not parse the Named Graph serialization, and hence would be unable to parse the Annotation graph at all." Content Negotiation is defined by the http protocol, and the first sentence seems to assume that Named Graphs must have http URIs. (Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe other dereferencable URI schemes can support http Content Negotiation???). OA has plenty of advice or requirements about resources with http URIs, but this seems to be the only facility in OA that can't be used except with http URIs. Bob [1] http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/#NamedGraph -- Robert A. Morris Emeritus Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3390 IT Staff Filtered Push Project Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University email: morris.bob@gmail.com web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/ web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram === The content of this communication is made entirely on my own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or Harvard University.
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 21:50:03 UTC